🏅 Top traders

@MrBeastly @Stralor
CCing moderator based on discussion below (https://manifold.markets/MrBeastly/cybersecurity-how-much-will-code-vu#qdcx50tndy)
Final metrics were published for Q4
Based on the original question, there were 48,244 - 40,077 = 8147 more CVEs, meaning the question should resolve 50% (<20,038).

Note: I updated the name/title to better reflect the values in the options.

@MrBeastly You completely changed the question? Please actually address the concerns in the comments below instead of changing the question entirely.

@mods Can we get some help here? The creator has been changing the resolution terms without informing anyone, the most recent of which completely changed the question. The question was initially talking about “increase” in CVEs and now it’s been switched to “how many.” The creator then bought into that category (100%) basically stealing from everyone else

@prismatic CyberSecurity: How much will Code Vulnerabilities (Published CVE Records) increase in 2025?

^ original question before the change is still in the description

@prismatic the title has changed but the meaning hasn't, no? the answersbhave stayed the same and I'm not sure there's a meaningful difference. the new title seems to ask the same thing ("how many more" = "increase") but with more clarity

@Stralor oh wait I see. it's not "how many more" bc there might not be an increase. interesting

@Stralor yeah

@Stralor the problem is that they shifted the ground of resolution from net increase to total number which is two completely different numbers

I dont think the answers changed tho. the logs show no changes to the raw numbers, just the phrasing

@Stralor the answers didn't change but question title did though right? It initially asked about increase aka (total for 2025 - total for 2024). It's now asking how many will there be aka (total for 2025). That's the difference.

CyberSecurity: How much will Code Vulnerabilities (Published CVE Records) increase in 2025?
^ this is also still in the description so its confusing

@prismatic ah I see. yeah that is a difference. +20k is different than =20k

@Stralor yeah this can't be reverted right now or anything, since the question hasn't been resolved, but I wanted this thread for evidence that there was question fuckery lmao

@Stralor does this meaningful change any investments? if you bet on 50% either way it's plausibly the same result (if it resolves that way)

@Stralor ehh initially I was on 200% off a misassumption that I thought might have been grounds to N/A from the get go (see evan's comment below). I bought 50%, but the author keeps twisting the question towards the 100% resolution, which is the bucket they keep buying.

It looks like it will increase by less than 50% or 20038 so should resolve to that if last data point is as expected

What happens if it's between 20038 and 40077? Or been 200385 and 400770?

Increase from 2024?

@NzJack0n lol mb

@NzJack0n Yes, compared to 2024... E.g.
- The "100%" slot = "100% of 2024, >40,077 CVEs (same as 2024) and 200% of 2024 <80,158 CVEs (double of 2024)"

@MrBeastly Whatever you said just contradicted the market terms I think? Take 2023 to 2024 for example, are you saying the increase is increase "11116" is 50% since 11116<0.5*28961 or are you saying net the number has increased by 40077/28961=138.38% so in the 200% bucket?

@MrBeastly also are you just buying off you own ambigious terms??

@MrBeastly that’s not what an increase is. This market is for increase, not what % of 2024. So 100% answer should be about 80k+. As that’s what a 100% increase would be. For example if it ended up 40077 that would be a 0% increase.

@MrBeastly it’s really bad to create trades for yourself when you have unclear market instructions